Forum Topic

Michael - don't pretend you don't know that Boris is very much under the thumb of the London Cycling Campaign, nor that you don't know how how it works.  For the benefit of others: our gifted leader Boris trusts Andrew Gilligan (yes, he of David Kelly trustworthiness) and appoints him as a "special adviser on transport". Gilligan is head of the cycle lobby. Boris then appoints him as a "special representative" at TfL, observing at Board level. Then there's Will Norman, TfL's Walking and Cycling Commissioner (ie someone whose job is not to be objective, but to favour cycling - no equivalent Driving Commissioner, I see). Norman's name was on the factually incorrect and misleading TfL press release about Temporary C9 last July before the decision to spend £3.3m of TfL money on a third of a mile of temporary cycleway on Chiswick High Road. (I wonder why TfL is bust?) Another name on the press release was Simon Munk (your 'boss' Michael) who heads the London Cycling Campaign - what were TfL thinking putting a quote from a partisan pressure group on a press release intended to pave the way for spending on that pressure group's wishes? No conflict of interest there, then?  Then there is you, running Hounslow Cycling Campaign, along with Cllrs Dunne and Lambert, and inviting Council Leader Steve Curran to your parties. And somewhere just off the bottom of the page is everyone's favourite patsy, the man that stands up in the church and takes the flak for you all, one Hanif Khan!So yes, Boris is under the thumb of the London Cycling Campaign.  He's probably just a bit thick to realise it, or what it's likely doing to any remaining support he has in London outside of K&C - and then he penalises our city for electing the wrong mayor.  It's not very joined up, but then not much is with our prime minister.

Amanda Smith ● 1638d

OK Al, thank you for that information. At the risk of sounding like the proverbial broken record, that is not consistent with what I have been told by TfL.  I acknowledge the signs into the underpass are not logical - and said as much in an earlier post.  Whether or not they imply that the run-up to the underpass is also shared, this could certainly be inferred, which is not helpful from a transparency and safety point of view. If the whole A4 pavement is shared then all parties to the sharing should have sufficient information to warn them of this.  And stepping out of eg the A4 ends of Dukes Avenue or Devonshire Passage onto the A4 pavement there is no information to make pedestrians aware that this pavement is shared.  That - and a rather frightening incident at one of those junctions with a speedy cyclist - is why I contacted TfL in the first place.  I couldn't understand why pedestrians were being put in jeopardy.  Devonshire Passage in particular is a "blind" exit from which it is extremely difficult to spot approaching cycle traffic from either direction but particularly any travelling towards Hogarth roundabout.The lack of information for pedestrians may be one reason for the unpredicatability you have witnessed.  Why would they look out for or get out of the way of cyclists if they are not expecting to see them?  And if TfL is to be believed, pedestrians should not HAVE to look out for them at the particular stretch of the A4 which we are talking about because (broken record, broken record) they say it is not a shared pavement.  This lack of signage is in contrast with the shared signage on eg Kew Bridge and on the section of the North Circular between Uxbridge Rd and Hanger Lane Gyratory which is both prominent and frequent.  The bottom line is that the expectations of pedestrians and cyclists are not the same.  Which is not good for the safety of either party.

Marie Power ● 1634d